Here's why the furor over birth control

A letter published Oct 13 asked "why the furor" about the executive order rescinding the Affordable Health Act (ACA) requirement to provide birth control pills that cost only $9 per month at Wal-Mart.

That order is repugnant on many levels. But the writer drills down to the cost, so I’ll respond to that.

Women of childbearing age insured by ACA plans were given access to safe and effective contraceptives with no copays. The result... unplanned pregnancies and abortions dropped significantly! At the very least, that suggests that many women simply could not afford the $9 per month cost the letter writer is privileged to deem affordable.

Even in a loving family that is already stressed, an unplanned child can be the proverbial straw that pushes them into a situation that requires some type of public assistance. Every unplanned teen pregnancy is life-altering, regardless of the decisions made after the fact… loss of educational opportunity; additional burden of child care, perhaps by grandparent(s); child support from the male partner who, if he is still in school, has little/no money, etc.

All scenarios are likely to require public dollars from some program in an effort to provide for the innocent child. This is what happens when healthcare decisions are made on initial cost basis.

The downstream costs are going to be a lot greater than $9 per month/per child. And every American, especially the child, pays.

Patricia Frey

Dagsboro

Rich, corporations are too influential

I hope all the discourse about the U.S. flag and the freedoms it represents will lead people to reflect on our Constitution, on which this democratic republic was founded. It outlines how the government works and, most important, establishes that all citizens have equal rights to representation through the principle of "one person, one vote" (Article 1).

Lately, more citizens have felt their freedoms eroding due to the powerful influence on our Congress by extreme wealth and by large corporations.

This should be of concern to all except the "top 1 percent," because when wealth and power create a link between donations and those who make or block policy we no longer have a democratic republic, we have oligarchy and individual rights are destroyed.

This situation was made worse when the Supreme Court in "Citizens United" decided that "money is speech" so limiting money spent in campaigns was limiting free speech.

This is truly a radical departure from the 1st amendment which certainly was not meant to create a class of voter who can-and does-donate millions in order to influence policy decisions that will bring them even more money.

If we want to retain our democratic principles, Citizens United along with gerrymandering must be eliminated.

Jeanette Robinson

Wilmington

Don't cut arts funding

We all have a stake in the arts; it simply is good business.

There are 4.8 million Americans now working in arts and cultural sectors, according to Americans for the Arts. This generates $22.3 billion in federal, state, and local government revenue.

The National Endowment for the Arts is the federal agency whose funding and support gives additional Americans opportunities to participate in cultural experiences. In 2016, the NEA recommended more than 2,400 grants in nearly 16,000 communities in every Congressional District in the country.

Thirty-six percent of NEA grants go to organizations that reach under-served populations, such as people with disabilities, people in institutions, and veterans. The NEA has been able to do this on a budget of $148 million.

President Trump's proposed budget for FY 2018 calls for an elimination of the NEA/NEH, among other cultural agencies. Please don't believe the arguments to eliminate these cultural agencies; it would not reduce effectively the deficit or the size of government and would inhibit private sector matching and greater than funding.

As a disabled professional artist/educator./entrepreneur, I encourage you to support the continuance of the NEA/NEH.

Jeffrey Pergament

Clifton Heights, PA

Tom Petty cartoon tasteless

I found the Oct. 7 cartoon depicting Tom Petty saying he couldn't believe he beat Dylan to heaven disrespectful and tasteless.

His family, friends and fans are grieving over the loss of a talented artist and loving family man, whose music will live for generations. Your paper should be ashamed.

Have some compassion. How would you like to see a cartoon about your family member who just passed away so unexpectedly?

Sherry Flocco

Wilmington

SPEAK UP

Send your take to letters@delawareonline.com. All reader-submitted content must include a name, home address and a phone number for verification. Verification does not guarantee publication.

For more information, click here or contact engagement editor Matthew Albright at malbright@delawareonline.com or (302) 324-2428.
You can also join the conversation online at facebook.com/groups/DialogueDelaware.